4.6 Article

Tea Dietary Fiber Improves Serum and Hepatic Lipid Profiles in Mice Fed a High Cholesterol Diet

期刊

PLANT FOODS FOR HUMAN NUTRITION
卷 71, 期 2, 页码 145-150

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11130-016-0536-7

关键词

Tea; Dietary fiber; Lipid profile; Antioxidant; Mice

资金

  1. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, China [2013PY091]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Hubei Province, China [2011CDB136]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tea dietary fiber (TDF) was prepared from tea residues and modified to get cellulose-modified TDF (CTDF) by cellulase or micronized TDF (MTDF) by ultrafine grinding. The in vitro lipid-binding capacities of the three fibers and their effects on serum and hepatic lipid profiles in mice fed a high cholesterol diet were evaluated. The results showed that the three fibers had excellent lipid-binding capacities, and the cholesterol- and sodium cholate-binding capacities of CTDF and MTDF were significantly higher than those of TDF. Animal studies showed that, compared to model control, the three fibers significantly decreased mice average daily gain, gain: feed, and liver index, reduced total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride, and low density lipoprotein-cholesterol of serum and liver, increased serum and hepatic high density lipoprotein-cholesterol to TC ratio, and promoted the excretion of fecal lipids, and they also significantly increased the activities of superoxide dismutase and glutathione peroxidase of serum and liver, and decreased lipid peroxidation; moreover, the effects of CTDF and MTDF were better than that of TDF. It was concluded that the three fibers could improve serum and hepatic lipid profiles in mice fed a high cholesterol diet and the mechanism of action might be due to the promotion of fecal excretion of lipids through their lipid-binding ability and the inhibition of lipid peroxidation. These findings suggest that tea dietary fiber has the potential to be used as a functional ingredient to control cardiovascular disease.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据